316

Email this story to a friend

McMillan Group International, a company that manufactures firearms and accessories, is claiming that Bank of America asked them find another bank for “political” reasons.

The company, whose different entities have been doing business with Bank of America for more than twelve years, says it has never made a late payment, and never bounced a check.

On Thursday, the Director of Operations Kelly McMillan explained on McMillan’s Facebook page:

Today Mr. Ray Fox, Senior Vice President, Market Manager, Business Banking, Global Commercial Banking [of Bank of America] came to my office. He scheduled the meeting as an ‘account analysis’ meeting in order to evaluate the two lines of credit we have with them. He spent 5 minutes talking about how McMillan has changed in the last 5 years and have become more of a firearms manufacturer than a supplier of accessories.

At this point I interrupted him and asked, ‘Can I [possibly] save you some time so that you don’t waste your breath? What you are going to tell me is that because we are in the firearms manufacturing business you no longer what my business.’

‘That is correct’ he [said].

I replied ‘That is okay, we will move our accounts as soon as possible. We can find a 2nd Amendment friendly bank that will be glad to have our business. You won’t mind if I tell the NRA, SCI and everyone one I know that BofA is not firearms industry friendly?’

‘You have to do what you must’ he said.

‘So you are telling me this is a politically motivated decision, is that right?’

Mr Fox confirmed that it was. At which point I told him that the meeting was over and there was nothing let for him to say.

The Daily Caller is reporting, in addition, that the bank representative remarked, “We have to assess the risk of doing business with a firearms related industry.”

Many ask, what risk would that be? Are there really enough people who would refuse to do business with Bank of America over having McMillan as a client that it justifies discontinuing the decade-long relationship?

And when the representative allegedly agreed that the motivation was “political,” did he mean among clients and executives, or government officials?

As a bank that received $20 billion in the bailout, many are outraged that the company seemingly finds constitutional rights a professional liability.

(Photo: McMillan)

McMillan has thanked the public for its support over Facebook, writing: “I know this is not about McMillan. It’s about the possibility of losing our freedom and right to keep and bear arms. If this had happened to any other company I am sure all of you would have been on their web page shouting your allegiance to the cause.”

The company assures its clients that many competing banks have offered their services, and Kelly McMillan is looking to see whether the company can stop accepting Bank of America cards.

See Glenn Beck’s take on the matter, below:

Meanwhile, Bank of America asserts that the allegations are false on itsFacebook page:

We want to let you know that we hear your comments and questions regarding one of our customers. While we cannot discuss the details of any individual client we work with, we can assure you the allegations being made here are completely false. Bank of America does not have a policy that prohibits us from banking clients in this industry. In fact, we have numerous, longstanding customers in the industry.

We are also extremely proud of our support of the US military and reject any assertion to the contrary. We count as clients many companies that provide for our nation’s defense. We employ thousands of veterans, Guardsmen, and Reservists, and plan to increase our hiring this year.